Eddard Stark hated Howland Reed

[sj4iy]

On April 4, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Ser Boros said:

Doesn't ned say something like "I would have been dead, if not for Howland" That sounds more like grudging respect 

And ask yourself this. If you were Ned, someone who's reputation is built on honour, and you are dueling someone, but someone else sneaks behind your opponent and kills him through treachery, Ned would consider that dishonourable. I dare say Ned would rather die than win a duel dishonourably 

It was never a duel.  It was simply a fight between two groups of men.  There's no honor to be won or lost here...the whole point was surviving.  And Ned has never spoken ill of Howland Reed.  Which pretty much gives you your answer.

[lyannaisalive]

Doesn't Robb mention Ned always said To Trust Howland? Robb never seems to doubt his loyalty

[SevasTra82]

4 hours ago, lyannaisalive said:

Doesn't Robb mention Ned always said To Trust Howland? Robb never seems to doubt his loyalty

Not to mention that Robb sent a very important letter to HR that legitimized Jon Snow.  That's not something a person would do unless they had complete trust and faith in them.

[kissdbyfire]

6 minutes ago, SevasTra82 said:

Not to mention that Robb sent a very important letter to HR that legitimized Jon Snow.  That's not something a person would do unless they had complete trust and faith in them.

I agree that Robb probably did send the will with Maege and Glover, but we don't really know for sure. When he tells them to take ship at Seaguard and go looking for HR, he says they'll take letters with fake Intel in case they're captured, but there's no mention of the will. There were others present, and it could turn up elsewhere. 

[watcher of the night]

I am not sure whether Ned hated Howland or not but something is fishy here. Howland was supposed  to be one of the most loyal bannermen of Ned. Yet he is completely out of picture.

I know that most would argue that Howland is out of the picture for storyline reasons but IMO that is a cheap and not very satisfactory explanation. He could have shown up here and there in some POWs without telling secrets but he is not even mentioned.

Robb calls his banners, Howland is not there, as far as we know not even a single cranogman fights for Rob.

Lords visits Bran at Winterfest; the Umbers and even Lord Manderly "too fat to sit on a horse", Howland is nowhere.

Robb stops at Moat Cailin, being as close to Greywaterwatch as possible yet Howland is still nowhere, in fact not a single cranogman shows up.

Yes, he send Meera and Jojen to Winterfell, but not for a visit or to pay respect but to take away Bran to the three-eyed raven (and we do not know what is his motivation behind this move).

 

Last but not least, consider this interesting observation (not mine):

Meera Reed = a redeemer

If Meera is a redeemer then who is need of redemption if not Howland? If so for what exatly?

[Tijgy]

On 4-4-2016 at 5:57 PM, Ser Yorick Ampersand said:

Howland saved his life "I would be dead if not for Howland Reed"

Howland kept his secrets about Lyanna Jon's true parentage

Howland sent his two sons to Winterfell

Both Jojen and Meera are very respectfull to the Starks and protect Bran

I think Howland Reed is the best friend Eddard ever had even more than Robert Baratheon.

I agree with the bold. (however Meera is a daughter not a son )

According to Ser Rodrik: 

"Howland Reed was a great friend to your father," Ser Rodrik told him. "These two are his, it would seem."

According to Bran:

And yet Howland Reed had been one of Father's staunchest companions during the war for King Robert's crown, before Bran was born.

According to Robb: 

I've sent word to Howland Reed, Father's old friend at Greywater Watch

And the most important quote: 

His father had sent letters to the Lord of Greywater over the years, but none of the crannogmen had ever called at Winterfell. 

If Ned really hated Howland, he would have not send all those love letters. 

[watcher of the night]

12 hours ago, Tijgy said:

I agree with the bold. (however Meera is a daughter not a son )

According to Ser Rodrik: 

"Howland Reed was a great friend to your father," Ser Rodrik told him. "These two are his, it would seem."

According to Bran:

And yet Howland Reed had been one of Father's staunchest companions during the war for King Robert's crown, before Bran was born.

According to Robb: 

I've sent word to Howland Reed, Father's old friend at Greywater Watch

And the most important quote: 

His father had sent letters to the Lord of Greywater over the years, but none of the crannogmen had ever called at Winterfell. 

If Ned really hated Howland, he would have not send all those love letters. 

Ned probabyl did not hate Howland but this is not how "best freinds" supposed to react.

[Tijgy]

1 hour ago, watcher of the night said:

Ned probabyl did not hate Howland but this is not how "best freinds" supposed to react.

Several times it is said they were great friends. Ned sent several letters to him over the years. And Robb has the faith that Howland would aid them. 

The crannogmen were still fighting against the Ironborn and the Boltons.

 

[Tijgy]

It is not like Ned would tell to Robb constantly Howland Reed has great worth, is a great companion, friends ... while at the same time they disliked each other. 

[the conquering bastard 25]

On 4/4/2016 at 0:50 PM, Forlong the Fat said:

There are a number of things missing from your first comment.  First, Ned wasn't solely in charge of Robert's rebellion, and couldn't decide if it happened or didn't.  Second, the regime he participated in rebelling against had, among other atrocities, cooked Ned's father alive and killed his brother, without any sort of process or real justification.  Among many other things, this was sufficient "honorable" motivation to overthrow the Targaryen regime.  What is "treason" and what is "freedom fighting" always depends on who is talking and who won.  But it's impossible to suggest that Ned lacked good, honorable reasons for rebelling. 

 

Third, as to his decisions related to Jon, by the time he was aware of Jon's existence, there would have been no reasonable way to restore Targeryen rule, even if Ned wanted to do that--as noted above, he had perfectly good reasons not to.  And at least two then-living Targaeyens (Viserys and Daenerys)  had superior claims to the throne, so Jon was by no means the "Targeryen King."  So you are really suggesting that subjecting Jon to the same fate as Viserys and Daenerys, or likely worse, would have been a "healthy" environment, as compared to raising him in safety, and with compassion and respect from Ned,Ned's children, and the rest of the Stark household, if not from Catelyn.  To suggest that this was dishonorable is to suggest that one need make the worst possible decisions in the name of truthfulness.

Edit:  the reason I commented so extensively on this, rather than the OP, is that the suggestion of the OP is so obviously not true, or even close to being true, that I think it doesn't merit discussion. 

You are kidding right. Rickard and Brandon were far from innocent.

In Brandons case if we are to believe Jamie Lannister. Came to the capital in the kings home and called for the Crowned Princes death. In real life to even think about or ponder the kings death was treason. Brandon was asking him to come out and die. Point one Brandon committed Treason and stannis points out treason is punishible by death. Yet Aerys has him connected to a contraption that so long as he doesnt move he lives but his father dies.

Rickard also isnt as blameless as many would like to imagine.

At the time of his death Brandon was to wed Catelyn. Robert to Lyanna. Jamie to Lysa and Blackfish to Redwyne.

Lannister= unlimited gold(war chest). Hatred of Targs from aerys possible raping the Lady of CR, killing her with said offspring, many slights and such at the kings hands. Then a possible demotion and imprisonment if Steffron Baratheons mission in the east goes off without a hitch)

Redwyne=big ass fleet and hatred of Targ regime stemming from Macr Tyrells mother who was originally a Redwyne and contrqcted to wed a Targ prince that preferred man pole to woman hole. 

Baratheon= claim to the throne.( probably saw Aerys as the man who got his father killed. Saw Rhaegar as the entitled Prince who needed a foreign bride that his father died trying to bring home for him. Crowned his bethothed Queen of Love and Beauty while married. Also who knows what type of relationship Rhaegar and Robert had before Lyanna and Stefford enter the.pic. on those occassions when Robert came to court how did Rhaegar and Robert interact? There were 1 cousin after all and Robert did stand in line for the throne as being the grandson of Rhaegars great aunt. Did the boys get along or was their tension in the relationship? Food for thought)

Stark= muscle\ lineage to make the link between the houses. Catlyen was too low born have wed Robert and makr queen. Think Aegon V and Bertha Blackwood. Anciet house but still some would have made note or grumbled about their marriage if he had.been higher on the Targ foodchain. The Tullys while an ancient house they werent even kings or Lps til the Targs upjumped them. Same might be said of the Redwynes. But Lyanna and Robert no cause for concern.

Tully= access to the middle of Westeros and has a strong base in which to make war on KL.(also beef as they had a Targ prince to wed into the family until said prince would have prefers his sister to his bethrothed. In oldertimes the rivers were used as a road system. With enough ships and a central location making was on the Targ regime just became childs play.

 

So Rickard and company werw making a coalition that could have spelled the end of Targ power if mishandled.

 

I tend to think thay Aerys when he is Expecially cruel that he thinks hes Tywin or handling the situatuon as he would.

So Luv but those marriage could be seen as those lords.making a powerplay. They were a far cry from innocent

[Sir Bronn]

Hell no

[Melisandre's White Pubes]

It could be that Ned couldn't talk about why Howland and himself are not on the best terms, so everyone in Winterfell just knows that Howland and Ned are good friends without it actually being true.

If HR+L=J (and maybe M), Ned might be unhappy with Howland for violating his sister's honor, but can't say that publicly.

[bb1180]

I don't see any evidence at all for the premise here.  All indications are that Ned Stark and Howland Reed were the good friends that we're led to believe they were. 

[Ser Hyle]

On 4/4/2016 at 11:07 AM, Ser Boros said:

Doesn't ned say something like "I would have been dead, if not for Howland" That sounds more like grudging respect 

And ask yourself this. If you were Ned, someone who's reputation is built on honour, and you are dueling someone, but someone else sneaks behind your opponent and kills him through treachery, Ned would consider that dishonourable. I dare say Ned would rather die than win a duel dishonourably 

Where do you get the grudging part from "I would have been dead, if not for Howland"?

I think you're projecting.

Where in the text do we learn that Howland snuck behind Ned's opponent and killed him through treachery?

[The Old Tongue]

On April 15, 2016 at 3:57 AM, watcher of the night said:

I am not sure whether Ned hated Howland or not but something is fishy here. Howland was supposed  to be one of the most loyal bannermen of Ned. Yet he is completely out of picture.

I know that most would argue that Howland is out of the picture for storyline reasons but IMO that is a cheap and not very satisfactory explanation. He could have shown up here and there in some POWs without telling secrets but he is not even mentioned.

Robb calls his banners, Howland is not there, as far as we know not even a single cranogman fights for Rob.

Lords visits Bran at Winterfest; the Umbers and even Lord Manderly "too fat to sit on a horse", Howland is nowhere.

Robb stops at Moat Cailin, being as close to Greywaterwatch as possible yet Howland is still nowhere, in fact not a single cranogman shows up.

Yes, he send Meera and Jojen to Winterfell, but not for a visit or to pay respect but to take away Bran to the three-eyed raven (and we do not know what is his motivation behind this move).

 

Last but not least, consider this interesting observation (not mine):

Meera Reed = a redeemer

If Meera is a redeemer then who is need of redemption if not Howland? If so for what exatly?

The crannogmen are reclusive. Greywater watch is always moving so I'm sure it's harder to communicate with HR. He did send his children to Winterfell to pledge support and perhaps their captivity by Theon kept him in check.

HR wouldve commanded the crannogmen to siege Moat Cailen. The bog devils were bombarding the ironborn with poison arrows.

we didn't see Reeds at the Red Wedding because they're feuding with the Freys.

In any case, I'm not sure how well the crannogmen are suited for open war. They're more of a guerila army. They could simply be charged with protecting the Neck from invading forces.

[JonCon's Red Beard]

On 19/4/2016 at 3:01 PM, Ser Hyle said:

Where do you get the grudging part from "I would have been dead, if not for Howland"?

I think you're projecting.

Where in the text do we learn that Howland snuck behind Ned's opponent and killed him through treachery?

Nowhere. People assume this all the time. This is the text:

"The finest knight I ever saw was Ser Arthur Dayne, who fought with a blade called Dawn, forged from the heart of a fallen star. They called him the Sword of the Morning, and he would have killed me but for Howland Reed." Father had gotten sad then, and he would say no more. Bran wished he had asked him what he meant.

We know nothing more. This "save" of him could be many things:

1. Howland Reed threw a frog at Arthur's face and Ned killed Arthur.

2. Howland Reed actually stabbed Arthur on the back while Ned fought.

3. Howland Reed stepped in front of a hurt Ned and defeated Arthur Dayne himself.

4. Howland Reed cured Ned after Ned defeated Arthur but got severely wounded.

It's left ambiguous in purpose so we can't know any better. Martin has made Reed very mysterious and without any further clue because that's one secret he wants to reveal later.

 

[Universal Sword Donor]

On 4/18/2016 at 4:09 PM, the conquering bastard 25 said:

You are kidding right. Rickard and Brandon were far from innocent.

In Brandons case if we are to believe Jamie Lannister. Came to the capital in the kings home and called for the Crowned Princes death. In real life to even think about or ponder the kings death was treason. Brandon was asking him to come out and die. Point one Brandon committed Treason and stannis points out treason is punishible by death. Yet Aerys has him connected to a contraption that so long as he doesnt move he lives but his father dies.

Rickard also isnt as blameless as many would like to imagine.

At the time of his death Brandon was to wed Catelyn. Robert to Lyanna. Jamie to Lysa and Blackfish to Redwyne.

Lannister= unlimited gold(war chest). Hatred of Targs from aerys possible raping the Lady of CR, killing her with said offspring, many slights and such at the kings hands. Then a possible demotion and imprisonment if Steffron Baratheons mission in the east goes off without a hitch)

Redwyne=big ass fleet and hatred of Targ regime stemming from Macr Tyrells mother who was originally a Redwyne and contrqcted to wed a Targ prince that preferred man pole to woman hole. 

Baratheon= claim to the throne.( probably saw Aerys as the man who got his father killed. Saw Rhaegar as the entitled Prince who needed a foreign bride that his father died trying to bring home for him. Crowned his bethothed Queen of Love and Beauty while married. Also who knows what type of relationship Rhaegar and Robert had before Lyanna and Stefford enter the.pic. on those occassions when Robert came to court how did Rhaegar and Robert interact? There were 1 cousin after all and Robert did stand in line for the throne as being the grandson of Rhaegars great aunt. Did the boys get along or was their tension in the relationship? Food for thought)

Stark= muscle\ lineage to make the link between the houses. Catlyen was too low born have wed Robert and makr queen. Think Aegon V and Bertha Blackwood. Anciet house but still some would have made note or grumbled about their marriage if he had.been higher on the Targ foodchain. The Tullys while an ancient house they werent even kings or Lps til the Targs upjumped them. Same might be said of the Redwynes. But Lyanna and Robert no cause for concern.

Tully= access to the middle of Westeros and has a strong base in which to make war on KL.(also beef as they had a Targ prince to wed into the family until said prince would have prefers his sister to his bethrothed. In oldertimes the rivers were used as a road system. With enough ships and a central location making was on the Targ regime just became childs play.

 

So Rickard and company werw making a coalition that could have spelled the end of Targ power if mishandled.

 

I tend to think thay Aerys when he is Expecially cruel that he thinks hes Tywin or handling the situatuon as he would.

So Luv but those marriage could be seen as those lords.making a powerplay. They were a far cry from innocent

Whoa whoa whoa whoa

Let's set aside Brandon's reaction and confrontations. A sane king would obviously have looked into why a future LP would be screaming for his son's life. Aerys was not sane. Brandon was an idiot.

Rickard? He's guilty of, and I'm extrapolating here, treason? Not because his son threatened the royal family, but because he wanted his children to marry outside the region? 

The Martells were sent on a frickin voyage to visit Highgarden and CR. Jaime was sent to RR and Cersei was set up for Rhaegar. Robert was a lord in his own right, so a daughter of an LP (and his BFF's sister) is kind of a slam dunk. Jaime wasn't even betrothed to Lysa (not Rickard's idea). Hoster tried to marry BF to a Redwyne, not Rickard. So unless Tywin, Robert, and Mace were guilty of treason, there's no reason why Rickard should die. That entire train of thought strains credulity

[Blade of Sunlight]

33 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

Whoa whoa whoa whoa

Let's set aside Brandon's reaction and confrontations. A sane king would obviously have looked into why a future LP would be screaming for his son's life. Aerys was not sane. Brandon was an idiot.

Rickard? He's guilty of, and I'm extrapolating here, treason? Not because his son threatened the royal family, but because he wanted his children to marry outside the region? 

The Martells were sent on a frickin voyage to visit Highgarden and CR. Jaime was sent to RR and Cersei was set up for Rhaegar. Robert was a lord in his own right, so a daughter of an LP (and his BFF's sister) is kind of a slam dunk. Jaime wasn't even betrothed to Lysa (not Rickard's idea). Hoster tried to marry BF to a Redwyne, not Rickard. So unless Tywin, Robert, and Mace were guilty of treason, there's no reason why Rickard should die. That entire train of thought strains credulity

This is simply completely legal medieval dynastic politics. Even if Aerys suspected treason (which he probably did since he was mad) he had no basis on which to acuse Hoster, Tywin, Rickard or any lord marrying his daughters/heirs. 

What Brandon did was indeed stupid, but not deserving of what, even by Westeros standards, is a cruel punishment, and without even a mock trial. But the best part is that the rebellion only started when Aerys, after murdering a bunch of lords and their fathers, then demanded the heads of two more lords without any basis, to (I assume) basically commit genocide of the whole Baratheon and Stark lineage.